Isn't option 4 just repeating the same mistake of placing mines away from territory we can actually fight/build on. Because in my view if there's no reward for pushing our rivals away from somewhere then how is this map going to prevent galaxy from becoming stagnant again?

Take earth for example, how much fun do any single one of you think would earth be if the resources outposts were to be placed on the ocean away from players instead of where we can place outposts and move our armies? This mentality would completely remove the strategical value there currently is from holding a continent (be it for the losing side to manipulate the war in their favour through choke points or for the simple fact of dwindling the enemy's economy).

Like what would be the point of going to AA if we can just cross to SA from Africa and take the resource outposts anyway just because we have bigger army? Hell why even cross to SA if we can just strip the enemy of their income effortlessly? What options would option 4 give the losing side to be able to stay in the war a bit longer and make it a memorable era if they have no way of keeping the winning side from steam rolling them simply because the resource outposts (that are fuelling the losing side) have been stupidly placed on the asteroid fields? Every map presented here and currently on the live server is poorly drawn.

In WW2 the soviet union moved their factories away from their enemy... Not towards them! Wut the hell, how is option 4 the obvious vote? Please reconsider this voting as all of these maps are flawed, the only one that kinda sorta goes against what every previous map did wrong in the galaxy theme is option 2 and even then the resource outposts are placed on the asteroids for some reason.

Keep looking at cosmetics, that'll fix the poor map design eventually. We have got to start looking at what works and apply it to a new map rather than picking the prettiest turd in the toilet.

To me, it would all depend on how far into the void those resources ops are. But I think most have equal distance from multiple sides to allow fighting over to be valid. But that's purely dependent on the distance to reach them. Which essentially, if it's more than 4, imo, near impossible to ever take back from a good team. But none the less, valid point. However the mines/wells can easily be moved to more suitable areas. But I do agree, to put resource ops in the middle of no where, it's pretty much impossible to lose them unless you are extremely inattentive to them.

It's not just the resource outposts, it's the whole maps in general, they over no counter play for the losing side. Maps should be more like earth where a good team even if under powered has a chance to stop the enemy team's advance and none of these maps has that. It's all poor map design.

Make the maps for the game play, for the players. Not for looks. A map needs a recipe to be successful like earth in my opinion and these maps haven't taken into account, even after all these years, anything of what a map really needs to excel at anything. No, you just add a million asteroids and call it a map and sell it, you sell it and it dies, honestly this theme should be called Battle Asteroids.

However what you just said @Malicewolf just gives more reason for everyone to say these maps are all poorly drawn, a map shouldn't have these long distances between a player and what escalates a war just to make it fair/look populated.

There's a particular map that i find really stupid, it's the one with a circle in the middle and 2 big living spaces east and west. That map is one example of a poorly drawn map. Even if you move the resource outposts to where people fight on it, they just load both sides with nukes and it becomes a dumb and anti-fun choke point. Why was this map even made seeing it clearly didn't take game play into account and it sure as hell wasn't made to be fun for the players, it just looked pretty and it sold for a bit until it didn't. <- I didn't even experience this, that was sent to me by a friend just now.

The problems are there, fixing it won't solve it. So i ask you, why content yourself with dirt and then try to fix what shouldn't have to be fixed in the first place when we can just make a proper map that WORKS? Why can't we do that?